September 15, 2012

Gender bias in job ads

I watched the first episode of Hilary Devey's Women at the Top on iPlayer earlier (available here for another week or so), in which Hilary tried to get to the bottom of why there are so few women in top management positions.

A (male) recruitment consultant highlighted the gender bias in job advertisements. He said that phrases such as 'exceptional individual' and 'must have gravitas' in an ad deter women from applying, as women tend not to describe themselves as 'exceptional'. He also said that if you ask ordinary people what sort of word 'gravitas' is, some people will say it is a neutral word, some people will say it is a masculine word, but nobody ever says it is a feminine word.

The programme included an experiment where the same job - that of chief financial officer - was advertised in two different ads, which used a different style of language. One ad used 'tough' language, and included phrases such as 'a demanding job', 'relentless focus' and 'outstanding leader', while the other used 'softer' language, such as 'engage with people at all levels' and 'make a significant contribution'. The second advertisement appealed more to three women all currently on the books of a recruitment agency.

The recruitment consultant said that not only are women put off applying for senior positions because of the language used in the ads, but should they apply and get as far as being invited for interview, they will probably be interviewed by selectors who have a stereotypical picture in their mind of a person 'with gravitas' or someone with 'relentless focus', and it's probably a man. The women, therefore, will probably be overlooked at the interview.

TrackBack

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Great post, Susan. Thanks.

Having seen it many times here in the US, I agree completely on the gender bias.

I wonder if Hilary plans on taking on the similar practise with respect to age bias. Terms such as "driving, energetic, innovative" all scream "young". "Seasoned" and "experienced" tend to express bias against younger applicants.

Human nature being what it is, I expect that these biases prevail somewhat equally on both sides of the Atlantic.

Thanks, John. Oh yes, there are age biases here too. And it's not just words in job ads. My name Susan firmly places me in a particular era - there were five Susans in my class when I was at school, but you never hear of little girls being called Susan these days. So, selectors can always discriminate on name alone.

It's possible that Hilary Devey might look into age discrimination - she's probably in her mid-50s. She's such an extroverted, uberconfident go-getter herself, however, that she tends to think that if you haven't reached the boardroom, it's your own fault.

I never gave much thought to "name-based" age discrimination, but I think you're spot-on.

Mine may be sort of "era-neutral" but I'm unsure. I say that based on knowing a lot of "John's" at all age levels. There were two John's in my form. To be sure, discrimination in terms of gender and ethnicity occur, sadly, all the time based on name.

I also never thought about it, but I can't think of many "Susan's" around here where I work.